The Dev Lead Dilemma: Letting Go Without Losing Control

You’ve been promoted to dev lead. You have a title, a team, and… a tight grip on everything. It’s not because you’re power-hungry—it’s because you care. You’ve built your career on precision, high standards, and problem-solving under pressure. But now, you’re no longer the hero coder. You’re the one building the environment for others to succeed.

And here’s the trap: it feels safer to keep your hands in everything. Safer to review every line, monitor every move, and triple-check that no detail slips through. But this safety is an illusion. The tighter you grip, the more you become the bottleneck. The more your team defers to you, the less they grow. And the more you cling to execution, the further you drift from leadership.

Delegation isn’t optional. It’s the bridge between being the one who delivers—and the one who develops others to deliver better.

Engineering leaders love data. Sprint velocity, bug counts, deployment frequency—they paint a picture of team performance. But metrics can mislead. You can be efficient without being effective. You can ship features without shifting business results. In today’s competitive landscape, the companies that thrive are those whose engineering teams are tightly aligned with business outcomes—where every commit contributes to a broader strategic goal. This post explores why that alignment matters more than ever, and how to build it into the DNA of your dev team.

In today’s fast-paced engineering landscape, code alone doesn’t cut it. Yes, being a great developer still matters—but it’s no longer the differentiator. What separates modern dev leads from everyone else is a rare, magnetic trait: ownership. Not just owning the work, but owning the mission, the process, and the outcome. Ownership is the force that transforms teams from task-driven to purpose-driven. It’s the quiet, consistent power behind trust, velocity, and innovation.

Ownership means stepping up—especially when something breaks, stalls, or wanders into ambiguity. It’s claiming responsibility without waiting for permission. And while it can’t be assigned, it can be inspired, modeled, and multiplied. Dev leads who embody ownership create teams that don’t just ship—they shine.

The tech world loves its rockstars. The late-night saviors. The engineers who ship code like magic and solve problems like puzzles. Naturally, they get promoted.

But here’s the rub: technical genius doesn’t automatically translate into leadership effectiveness. Promoting a hero coder into a team lead role without support or retraining is like handing a sword to a chef and calling them a knight. It’s not just risky—it’s reckless.

The Problem No One Talks About

Most engineering teams don’t collapse with a bang.
They wither in silence.

Deadlines slip.
Feedback becomes shallow.
Code reviews lose energy.
Collaboration shrinks to the bare minimum.
And the team that once felt alive? Now it feels like everyone’s just… surviving.

You might assume it’s a tooling issue. A resourcing problem. A motivation dip.
But what’s really happening is deeper, more dangerous, and almost invisible.

The silent killer of engineering teams isn’t technical.
It’s psychological.
And its name is psychological safety — or rather, the lack of it.

[Read more…]

I used to think leadership was the natural next step after mastering technical excellence.

After all, if you can solve the hardest problems in code, surely you can guide a team of engineers to do the same… right?

Wrong.

I learned the hard way that being a great developer and being a great leader require entirely different skillsets. What got you here won’t get you there.

Today, let’s unpack why the transition from coder to leader is so challenging — and how companies can stop unintentionally setting their best people up to fail.